DerKommissar

OH, right. Sturmpanzer means "Assault Tank", right? The thing doesn't look like an assault tank -- did they just name it to prevent the Artillery branch from taking it?

Both the LAV-25 and LAV III have received armour upgrades since Shock Force time (2008). I am eagerly awaiting the release of the Canadian campaign for CMSF2, to check this out. In my CMSF experience, the LAV III had little problem with Syrian IFVs. The LAV has better situational awareness, and would fill up a BMP full of 25mm before they had time to swing their turret around. I did my best to keep LAV III's on overwatch, after reading how badly those vehicles handled HMG fire in Afghan. Generally speaking, American designs are tall. Even the Bradley is significantly taller than any comparable IFV. The war-winning Sherman was tall as heck. There's an argument to be made for choosing crew ergonomics over silhouette reduction. Why not go with the 40mm Bofors, then? What sort of BMP3 variant has 100mm RHE against APFSDS? I do not think it's fair to compare a wheeled AFV's firepower to a tracked one. Even with the 30mm, the Stryker is a far cry from the 100mm cannon the BMP 3 carries. Which, brings me back to my original question. Is the 30mm Stryker going to be used as an IFV, or is it simply an upgrade to an APC? The latter makes more sense to me, and follows the world-wide trend.

Were the sturmpanzer I and II called Bison I and II by the Germans? Or was that also an Allied invention? Were the sturmpanzers considered tanks or self-propelled artillery, in German Doctrine?

1. US Army's APC needs a bigger gun than its IFV? The BMP-3 has rudimentary aluminum armour, can't the 25mm APFSDS-T will not penetrate it? They'd be facing mostly BMP1s and 2s, is it worth the logistical hassle to use an uncommon caliber? 2. They have quite a few upgrade packages for the platform. They're in use by quite a few nations, US included. 3. That's a good point. I know both vehicles are based on the Piranha, not certain how many parts are interchangeable. Slapping a modern LAV turret on top of a Stryker would be the best of both worlds.

Wow, great post. I'm no art critic -- but I think his paintings should have qualified him for admission. He obviously has talent, and would have benefited much from Art School. I had a statistics teacher (who was Jewish) in high school. He said that there was nothing more dangerous than an uneducated philosopher and that Hitler was an uneducated philosopher. Which begs the question: if he had post-secondary education, would he still birth Nazism?

Waiting time may very.

The mod they cannibalized to make that was much cooler -- it had USSR, USA and even North Korea. Nostalgia sells these days. A Cold War game would sell like hot cakes, think of how many nations can get their own packs? It's an era that is still relevant, and in recent memory -- but quite different technology wise. It really depends if BFC is personally interested in the period. I know they said they won't ever make WW2 Pacific games. How about a game set in 1962? During the Cuban Missile Crisis? It's a fairly well-researched conflict, and historically significant. 1960's Caribbean is a very fresh setting for a wargame. Various branches of the US would encounter UNCON Cuban guerrillas, as well as a significant combined-arms Soviet force.

I'm getting this one. I want more naval games. What I wouldn't do for a modern Fleet Command. I'd like to see more WW2 naval theatres than just the Atlantic and Pacific: Arctic, Baltic, and Mediterranean (Black Sea too). Still, pretty excited to sink defenseless freighters.

My answer to Hun HMGs, in one of the US campaigns in CM:BN, was light mortars. I had platoon level light mortars that proved invaluable. As soon, as I saw that stream of yellow tracer -- I set TARGET in the approximate area with one of the mortars. The 60mm is a good mortar, lobbing shells over the hedgerows and into Jerry's living room. If you pit BARs against HMGs, you're gonna have a bad time. Apparently, there's a bug that makes BARs shoot semi-auto at long distances. Even in a perfect world, using a 20-round WW1 relic to suppress a modern GPMG is a hard sell. Either way you cut it, an infantry assault against an HMG is a bad time. This situation is best left to your supports: AFVs, artillery and, as previously mentioned, mortars. Combined arms is the name of the game. I often forget to make good use of smoke. A smoke screen in front of the HMG, is a good way to move up. Even then, I would recommend to flank/bypass/outmaneuver the HMG's kill zone.

Get CMBS, then. You'll have all the officially supported modern titles, then (I do hope we'll get CMA, in the future). It's more "modern" than CMSF2, including a lot of new high-tech gameplay mechanics. It's also got a lot of content -- 3, unique and diverse, factions. There's also a pack that brings in more QB maps and singleplayer campaigns. From what I read, CMFI's Rome to Victory, is the next content they're releasing. If you are interested in the Eastern Front, CMRT is a must-have. I am playing CMFB, right now -- it was the last on my CM to-buy list, completing my CM2 collection. CMFB is probably the most focused CM game, covering a very specific time period (which turned me off, at first). I am impressed by the graphics, and the massive scope of the Pieper campaign (I had to turn down my graphics settings). I remember seeing that USMC was mentioned -- did I miss the official mention of the VDV being included? CMFB really needs Battle of Scheldt, with amphibious missions!

I hope folks are more careful in the future, regarding scammers and phishing (fake websites). Keep an eye out for Soviet-levels of deception, they can make their website (email or phone number) look exactly like your bank's (let alone a game distributor). Older people being their target audience, so to speak. Most security breaches (even for businesses) happen due to people giving up their info, unwittingly. Recently, a lot of new high profile game releases have been moving away from Steam. Some REALLY big ones are now going to be Epic Store exclusives. Others are being pulled back into Publisher's own platforms (Uplay, Origin). The industry is moving away from Steam, for the same reason BFC is -- the hefty Valve tax. As a Steam user, I am not happy with it -- and many others are not, either. This being said, I can't blame them -- it's a free market.

It's a more question of quantity, than quality. BFC supports 6 standalone games -- each with their own DLC. Graviteam supports only 2: Mius Front and Tunisia 1943 (a recent branch). However, they do not support Achtung Panzer (some campaigns are sold as DLC, though), Steel Armour or Steel Fury. So, a great deal of their content is left obsolete. CM may benefit from convenient automated patching (not necessarily Steam). But, the main issue is the plethora of wide ranging standalone titles that we know and love. I hope BFC manages to synchronize and standardize all the titles, in one form or another.

Sherman -- best overall tank of the war?

Are all the revamped campaigns out for SF 2, yet?

My apologies, friend. I forgot memes were a touchy subject in the EU, right now.

You do not need to reduce the entire building to rubble, just deliver an effective eviction notice to the residents. BLAST xD

Yeah, it's a fairly common camo -- at least, in the West. I'm guessing it would be what the Allies would be seeing in France, circa 1944. Or a variant of such: "Ausf.H of the IInd Panzerdivision, France, June 1944." -- Tank Encyclopedia. I remember reading that German AFVs shipped with buckets of paint (seasonal) -- so, it was up to the crew's artistic skill to paint them. At once, Lord Protector Cromwell: The Hun Mark 4 is the most bombastic, fabulous, ponce water-carrier throughout the realm.

The Zimmerit looks cool. That's its primary function, btw. The P. 4 is the most tricked out, styling, pimp tank ever.

Sehr gut! We need them to reinforce the depleted pixeltruppen! The allies have suffered a series of critical mechanical failures that have crippled the firepower of their squads! Now is the time for a counter attack -- Oh, no. The're not in their trenches -- they panicked!

Hollywood loves their explosions. In reality, cars do not get blown sky high after being hit by small arms fire. This being said, I suppose it is possible that a tracer round somehow gets stuck inside a fuel tank (most likely, it'd go straight through). It can set off the petrol -- but it'll burn rather than explode. Most flamethrowers had separate pressure tanks, for propelling the petrol out of the fuel tank: So, if the pressure tank is hit by a bullet -- it could burst. So you may get a small non-fiery explosion. Assuming the operator is being shot from the back, the pressure tank bursting and a fuel leak igniting would be in the direction of the bullet's entry hole -- away from the operator. So, you won't get a fireworks display from one of these -- and if you're being shot at by tracer ammunition, you got bigger problems.

or

An interesting symposium, but very vague and unfocused. I don't agree with his analysis that maneuver warfare is distinctly Asiatic. The means of waging war depend on the target terrain. Maneuver warfare makes sense in wide open fields of Ukraine or the steppes of Mongolia. If you are an island nation, like Britain or Japan -- what's the use of a large, mechanized, land army? The ocean is your domain, and space is a premium -- it makes more sense to invest in professional naval infantry (SNLF or Royal Marines). Same applies to the U.S.A., as their most important means of defense are the two massive oceans separating it from Europe and Asia. However, if they are defending rural Germany -- maneuver warfare is a must.

Yeah, this series would benefit from a proper AI. If we're all around the wishing well, about now... It'd be cool if you could purchase delayed reinforcements for cheaper, in QB. It would be a tactical decision, how you want to schedule your units.